Forum:Replacement XO / 2nd in Command
So, Miranda is the Normandy's executive officer and second in command. If she died in the suicide mission, who would make a good replacement? Garrus is probably Shepard's most trusted ally in general, but may run into trouble with the crew. Jacob will get along better with the crew, but neither he nor Garrus have skill in commanding a ship. So who makes the most sense? --OmegaPaladin 16:01, July 31, 2010 (UTC) :Zaeed. No, really I'd say Mordin probably has the most experience, so I'd make him the second in command. Maybe Tali, what with her experience with space ships and all. Legion would bring a whole new level of efficiency to the table because it's a synthetic robot-esque being, but no one would accept it, because it's a geth. Arbington 16:13, July 31, 2010 (UTC) :Garrus would work because he is a good leader. He survives the suicide mission if he is the 2nd team leader and nobody has experience commanding a ship. Legion can't have a normal conversation. Tali is too shy. Mordin is too wierd. But anyway, it doesn't matter because the second in command doesn't command the ship. Shepard does. (hehehe...Who is gonna import a character with Miranda dead anyway?)Lx MALEX xl 07:00, August 17, 2010 (UTC) ::It'd pretty much have to be Jacob. The Normandy is a Cerberus ship, after all, which is why Miranda is the XO/Second in Command. As for the others, and overlooking the Cerberus issue, I'd rule out the following based on no known experience commanding ships, or anything, for that matter: Mordin, Thane, Grunt, Jack, Kasumi, and Samara/Morinth. No known command experience of any sort? Not a candidate. ::So, that leaves Garrus, with his merc team leader experience, Legion (operating under the generous assumption that it has access to command knowledge and such by virtue of its status as a geth platform), Tali (experience leading a small team), and Zaeed (experience running Blue Suns and independent merc teams). Out of those, Legion would be ruled out for the same reason unmanned combat aircraft are a bad idea. Organics are more adaptable and better at thinking on their toes and outside the box. Tali has demonstrated an inability to command the respect and consequently the obedience of even a handful of soldiers when she makes an unpopular decision. So she's out. That really only leaves Garrus and Zaeed. And the one time we know of that Garrus was in command of a squad, he got everyone killed, That leaves... Zaeed. He's got experience commanding large numbers, and has a proven track record of getting things done. ::Honestly though, I'm not sure why we're restricting it to squad members. It'd make much more sense to select the new XO from the crew of the ship, not from the passengers. Joker would seem the logical choice overall. SpartHawg948 07:18, August 17, 2010 (UTC) ::Zaeed has a proven track record of being unlikable enough that lots of people are willing to betray him for money. Probably not a good choice for XO. Garrus was also betrayed but only by one person 01:08, January 10, 2011 (UTC) :::Zaeed being unlikeable is, if anything, another reason to make him XO. After all, it has been remarked many a time that if the crew likes the XO, he isn't doing his job. As for your argument as a whole, there really isn't any truth to it. We know of one time that Zaeed was betrayed, and it wasn't for money. It was for control of a powerful and influential organization, the Blue Suns. SpartHawg948 01:13, January 10, 2011 (UTC) :::: When I said betrayed, I said lots of people, so I wasn't referring to Vido, I was referring to the regular mercs. Vido betrayed him to get control of the organization, his subordinates betrayed him because Vido paid them to do so, so obviously they don't respect him much. Of course we only know of one time zaeed was betrayed, but at the same time we only know of one time that garrus led his team to their deaths. And that's after a long time of successfully leading 12 people to cause a lot of trouble for 3 big merc groups. There was even a message from some guys wife that said her husband respected Garrus and wouldn't have blamed Garrus for his death. Besides if zaeed is a good leader, then he would've been made as a good choice for second team leader during the final mission, but he's not, and garrus is. 01:46, January 12, 2011 (UTC) :::::So... it's bad that Zaeed was betrayed, even if it was only once, but it's okay that Garrus led his entire team to their deaths, because it was only once? Weird. And by your logic, Zaeed is still the better choice. Sure, Garrus led a group of twelve people that caused a lot of trouble for three merc groups. Note that I don't say he led it successfully, because it can't be called a success when his leadership gets everyone killed. Zaeed, on the other hand, led a much larger group that caused trouble for a whole lot more than just three little local groups of mercs. The bit about the letter to Garrus, btw, is irrelevant to the discussion. That deals more with the feelings one individual had toward Garrus, and as such is a matter of charisma, not leadership. :::::As for your second point, about the team leader, the logic is specious, to say the least. If we accept this, it would surely mean that Miranda would be an ideal leader herself, which she fully acknowledges she is not. It would also mean that Jacob is actually the ideal choice, as he is a fully qualified second team leader who (unlike Garrus) hasn't led a team straight to its death. Gameplay mechanics should not be used as the basis for this discussion. SpartHawg948 02:12, January 12, 2011 (UTC) ::::: What I meant is that as far as we know, both of them were betrayed only once, so your logic that zaeed was only betrayed once so it can be dismissed doesn't make sense since both were only betrayed once. The difference is that garrus was betrayed by one person resulting in the death of his team, zaeed was betrayed by many resulting in his near death. The only reason zaeed's team (as in the rest of the blue suns) didn't die is because the whole lot of them turned against him. Also, Garrus' leadership didn't get everyone killed, the mercs got hold of one of his team members and threatened him. It reflects badly on his ability to judge someone's character, but it says nothing negative about his leadership skills. His operation was largely successful, if you recall, their aim was to kill/disrupt/piss off the mercs, and they succeeded since 3 different groups who hate each other banded together because they are really pissed off at him. ::::: Neither of us knows how big/powerful the blue suns were back when zaeed was in charge, because it was never explicitly stated. However if you let Vido get away, Zaeed said something along the lines of "I wasted twenty years of my life" and he also mentioned that the blue suns were created around 20 years ago. So it's safe to assume that he was betrayed not long after the creation of the group which means that they were likely not that big. I don't see how you can separate charisma from leadership just like that, good leaders need to have charisma and they also need to command respect, that's just general knowledge. Also as for XOs being unlikable, that comment doesn't make sense because an unlikable person does not automatically make a good XO. I have some experience with the army and a good XO is usually not liked BECAUSE he/she is the XO, not the other way around. And the reason they are usually not liked is because good XOs are usually very strict and it's part of their job to play the bad cop role and re-direct any hostile feelings towards themselves so that nobody develops hostile feelings towards the leader of the group. ::::: I also disagree with your comments about the gameplay mechanics, the suitability of each person for a particular role during the last mission is meant to reflect their character/abilities e.g. Grunt is a tough krogan soldier, hence he is good at holding the line. Zaeed is a tough mercenary who has survived many near death situations, hence he is also good at holding the line. Mordin is a scientist and even though he was in the STG, the STG is not an "attack from the front" type of group they're more like a "hit and run" type of group, hence he is not good at holding the line. Miranda lead a project for two years and it was implied that she's lead other projects, hence she is a capable leader. Jack hates working with other people and is a bit crazy, hence she is horrible at leading a team. Tali does not command the respect of others (e.g. prazza ignoring her orders), hence she is not a good leader. I don't really care about Jacob (only used him when I absolutely must), so I won't make any comments about his suitability as XO. Also not entirely sure what you mean with that comment about Miranda. 13:17, January 12, 2011 (UTC) ::::: BTW, in case it's not obvious, I'm the same person as 202.53.199.23. I wrote those others at work, so that's why they're short and I probably didn't word things properly. 13:24, January 12, 2011 (UTC) ::::::No, Zaeed was only betrayed by one guy as well. Vido. The other guys were batarian thugs who had no personal loyalty whatsoever to Zaeed, nor did he want their loyalty. Remember how he called them a bunch of terrorists? Anywho, both Zaeed and Garrus got betrayed once that we know of. You claim that Zaeed's was the more disasterous of the two, for reasons I can't even begin to understand. I, on the other hand, seeing how well Garrus' leadership and betrayal turned out (only two of the twelve surviving), consider Garrus' leadership the more suspect of the two. We seem to be at an impasse on this point. ::::::As for the Blue Suns, instead of assuming when it was that Zaeed left, we could look. The Blue Suns were founded in 2160. The split and Zaeed's departure occurred five years later, in 2165. (All this being present in the Timeline) Five years is a fair amount of time. I'd be willing to bet that in that time, he led more than twelve people. ::::::Next, of course my comment about the XO being disliked makes sense, to someone who has been in the military (aka the place where you find XOs). The reason for this is simple: In the chain of command, the XO is the disciplinarian. It's the XOs job to keep the crew in line while the commander handles the bigger picture. The commander only intervenes in disciplinary matters for very serious matters. As the XO is normally the one who has to maintain order and discipline, it's beneficial for the XO to be distant and aloof from those below him, to avoid charges of favoritism and such. Due to this, and due to the fact that normal interactions with the XO are unpleasant (either being matters of discipline or where the XO will be exhorting the crew to work harder), the XO is generally disliked. It's not a hard concept. As for separating charisma from leadership, again, having been in the military, I know the two are pretty unrelated. At the very least, you can have one without the other. Some of our greatest generals were pretty darn uncharismatic. Leadership isn't all about looking dashing and giving rousing speeches, you know. In fact, very little of that is usually involved. I'm speaking from experience here. ::::::As for gameplay mechanics, disagree all you want. All I'm saying is that we should judge the characters themselves, and not something immutable and ultimately irrelevant to the discussion, like gameplay mechanics. After all, per gameplay mechanics, personal loyalty to the Commander helps better one's chances for survival. This is true to the degree that, while a loyal Grunt is the most formidable defender, a non-loyal Grunt dies first, even before Mordin. Following your reasoning that gameplay mechanics must not be disregarded, it thus stands to reason that, while a loyal Grunt could defeat Mordin any day of the week, a non-loyal Grunt could only beat Mordin if Mordin too is non-loyal. This of course, makes no sense, and should illustrate the folly of using gameplay mechanics as a basis for argument. SpartHawg948 18:17, January 12, 2011 (UTC) ::::::*Just to reiterate, as it seems to have been lost somewhere, I think the best option for a replacement XO, were one needed, would be Jacob. He's Cerberus (which is pretty important on a Cerberus ship), has experience crewing ships, unlike most others in the squad, and has the right attitude. He's a consummate professional who can get things done and not get distracted or let personal feelings interfere with things. If not Jacob, I'd say Joker, which makes sense given his experience. I'm arguing in favor of Zaeed as basically my #3 choice. And in all fairness to Garrus, he'd likely be my #4 choice, I just happen to think Zaeed would be a better XO than Garrus. SpartHawg948 18:38, January 12, 2011 (UTC) ::::::: I think see where our disagreement lies for the first part, your focus is more on the end result (garrus' whole team dead vs zaeed surviving), in which case I agree garrus' end result is worse. However I focus more on the act itself and I see it as Garrus was betrayed by Sidonis (a single person who was both threatened and bribed) versus Zaeed being betrayed by at least 7 (Vido and the 6 men Vido bribed). Everything I've read implies that Vido only started recruiting battarians after he usurped Zaeed (since when Zaeed was in power, he was opposed to hiring battarians). Zaeed also said something along the lines of "Vido paid my men" as in they weren't complete strangers new to the group but people he's worked with before, hence at least 7 people betrayed him, not 1. Your comments about the XO is basically the exact same thing I said, my point was that the XO is unlikable AFTER he/she becomes the XO. They didn't get promoted to XO because they are unlikable. However Zaeed being unlikable is really a matter of personal preference, so I'll drop this. I think you have the wrong definition of Charisma, it's not all about "looking dashing and giving rousing speeches". It's more like personal magnetism. Looks and the ability to BS well helps of course, but is not all there is to it. I've known people who are horrible speakers and yet are very charismatic. As for loyalty, it's pretty much explicitly stated for some of them and implied for others that the loyalty mission is about helping those squad members solve their problems so they can focus on the mission. Despite ability, an unfocused person can fail at a task where a focused person with less ability succeeds. Think of it this way, suppose you were going up against someone in a competition where you're no 1 in the world and the other person is ranked lower. But you have a horrible stomach ache while they are fully focused, chances are you won't be able to concentrate/focus so you will make stupid mistakes and not do as well as you normally would. Depending on how good the other person is compared to you, you may very well lose. I do agree that logically Jacob would be the best choice since he has experience and is the current no 3, but as mentioned, I don't like Jacob so I would never pick him. Garrus is not my top pick either, he's further down the list. My first pick would be Mordin because he's practical and in many ways a realist. He also likely wouldn't want to do it so he'll delegate stuff to the others and since he's quite smart and perceptive he should be able to delegate well. 06:52, January 13, 2011 (UTC) ::::::Yes, I do tend to be more focused on the end results, as ultimately, you gauge success or failure by the end results. When it comes to things like this, matters of life and death, the cliche is wrong. It IS whether you win or lose, NOT how you play the game. Now, as for Zaeed, he actually states that the issue that led to the disagreement between himself and Vido was the hiring of batarians. This explicitly confirms (not implies, but confirms) that the hiring of batarians took place while Zaeed was there, that Zaeed objected to it, and that then Vido turned on him, using Blue Suns (Zaeed's men, as he was still a leader of the Blue Suns) to do it. ::::::Now, when did I ever say that people become XOs because they are unlikeable? Answer: Never. I said that being unlikeable certainly wouldn't hurt when talking about potential XOs. And no, I don't have the wrong definition of charisma. I know exactly what it means. Personal magnetism, looking dashing, and giving rousing speeches do tend to go hand in hand. And again, some of the greatest generals of all time have been as charismatic as mud. Walter Bedell Smith, for example. Never won popularity contests. Great general. Ditto for Gerd von Rundstedt and many others. And some of the worst commanders history has ever seen have been some of the most charismatic. George Custer. George McClellan. Ambrose Burnside. Benjamin Butler. I could keep going here. My point simply was, when determining suitability for a position like this, charisma matters about as much as hair color and shoe size. (BTW, I think Zaeed wins the former, Garrus the latter!) Charisma is great, when coupled with ability. When not, it gets people killed. Lots of people. And from what I've seen, maybe Garrus had a little more charisma than he did ability. Now, lack of charisma can hurt, in certain situations (like a mercenary group), but in an organization like Cerberus, discipline provides what charisma cannot. Trust me, I know this for a fact, having lived through it. ::::::I'm sorry, but your gameplay mechanics thing doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. Your scenario makes no sense, given that we know that comparatively, Grunt is (quite literally) the best, and Mordin is (quite literally) the worst, to the point that a loyal Mordin can still die on the suicide mission, while a non-loyal Grunt still stands a good chance of surviving. Given that we know this for a fact, your argument doesn't seem to carry much water, metaphorically speaking. On a side note, I think Mordin would make a terrible XO, mostly due to his personality (he seems way too easily distracted for a job like that), but let's not get into that one. I think we're just better off agreeing to disagree on what is a purely hypothetical matter anyways. SpartHawg948 07:21, January 13, 2011 (UTC) :::::: I was referring to this "Zaeed being unlikeable is, if anything, another reason to make him XO". I have no idea who any of those generals are, though I'm assuming they're american generals (I'm not american) the only one whose name I sort of recognised is Custer. Here's the thing though, a great general is not necessarily a great leader. They could just be very good at formulating effective strategies and tactics and yet outside of war nobody would listen to their opinion on anything. It is possible that the men Zaeed was referring to are newly recruited battarians, but it's never explicitly stated, so it's also equally likely that Vido bribed some of Zaeed's most trusted men. The other thing is, Garrus wasn't even there when his men were attacked so if they made bad choices during the attack it's not his fault. And also, if the situation is bad enough it doesn't really matter how good a leader you are or how good your team are you still can't win. For the gameplay mechanics you say it doesn't make sense, but you're not saying what exactly doesn't make sense, so I'm not sure how to reply to that. Logically speaking I also think Mordin would make a bad XO and Jacob is the best choice, I'm just saying that he is one of my favourite squad members so I would pick him and if anyone asks, those are the reasons I would give them. 08:07, January 13, 2011 (UTC) :::::::Yeah, not knowing who those generals are really hurt my argument. The reason I chose them (all of them, the good and the bad) was that they were great leaders. All of them were great leaders of one sort or another (with the possible exceptions of von Rundstedt, who was German, and Custer). Smith went on to be a top adviser to numerous Presidents. McClellan ran for President in 1864, against Abraham Lincoln, and almost won. Burnside and Butler were both respected leaders before and after the American Civil War, in which they served as generals. Everybody listened to their opinions. However, if anything, when you say "a great general is not necessarily a great leader. They could just be very good at formulating effective strategies and tactics and yet outside of war nobody would listen to their opinion on anything", you're making my point for me. My point is that charisma does not matter for an XO. It isn't a skill that is at all necessary. Not at all. All they need is the ability to effectively handle personnel (in the administrative sense) and logistics. Charisma does not matter here. Nor did I say that it was Garrus' decisions on the spot that got his men killed. It clearly wasn't. However, his overall leadership most definitely was what put them in that situation, and was what got them killed. You're right, if a situation is bad enough, no matter how good a leader you are, you can't win. But, and here's the thing: The really good leaders don't get stuck in no-win situations. If you or your people are backed into a no-win situation, it's because you (as the leader) have failed. This is the very essence of leadership. The fact that Garrus allowed his men to get ambushed like that is what undercuts his leadership, IMO. Now, as to the gameplay mechanics, I meant exactly what I said, and I said why it doesn't make sense. Your analogy was flawed. Simple as that. Seriously though, I've asked a couple times if we can just agree to disagree, because I'm not winning you over, and you aren't winning me over. Each time though... my request has seemingly been rebuffed. So I'll ask again: how about we just agree to disagree? After all, this is all purely hypothetical and subject to opinion. SpartHawg948 08:26, January 13, 2011 (UTC) HAY U GUIZ I CAN TYP A BUNCH ALSO Okay guys, you've both got fantastic points, even if we've begun to lose sight of what they are. I'm just going to throw out my vote for Garrus, though, and I don't care for a novel-sized lecture as to why someone else is better. Only a handful of the remaining crew members would make adequate leaders, and it ultimately dwindles down to A) experience, B) charisma does matter, Spart!, and C) motivation. A) EXPERIENCE :As the rest of this thread has kicked the "Vakarian vs Massani" horse from death to an unrecognizable pulp, I don't think I need to elaborate... yet. The other potential candidates could only be Jacob Taylor and Mordin Solus, whom both have served in respective military fields. Samara could be brought up in this category due to her mercenary days, but suche tmes are long in the past, and she no longer follows that mentality of an asari in her maiden years. However, the last two candidates have never really been in positions of leadership, thus stumping their candidacy. :It comes back down to Garrus and Zaeed. Garrus has served the Turian military, worked with C-Sec, the Alliance via Shepard, and even formed his own vigilante group to take on the major gangs of the more lawless systems in the galaxy. Zaeed formed the Blue Suns, got kicked fm the payroll by his partner Vido, and spent the rest of his life as a ruthless gun for hire. While Zaeed may very well have endured and survived more, he has lived his entire life knowing only the mercenary life. Garrus has experienced government police discipline, as well as that of his own military, achieved grand heights as a hero of the galaxy, and formed his own band of merry... aliens, where he planned, coordinated, and executed his own missions with deadly precision. My vote goes to Garrus for his numerous vantage points of fighting, rather than Zaeed's supposed lifetime of bloodshed. You can learn how to peel off a Krogan's head plate, but it's a lot easier to organize an ambush and take him out before he realizes the half dozen Vorcha he has with him are already dead. B) CHARISMA :From smooth talkers to blatant shouters, there aren't many on the team who have quite the flexibility that Shepard does. Again my vote goes to Garrus in this. I'm getting this out of the way quickly because there really aren't any other characters that can chum up with the rest of the crew and still give orders with a straight face. For argument's sake, Zaeed is just to bull-headed and savage to gain the loyalty of those under him. Zaeed will casually walk over the corpses of his teammates without a batted eyelash, while Garrus will at least feel a pang of regret that he couldn't save them sooner C) MOTIVATION :Since Vido's betrayal, Massani has survived solely on his thirst for vengeance. He doesn't care that the Reapers are encroaching upon the galaxy, that all life will be eradicated and that the cycle will start anew. He'll hunt for his quarry til the day a Reaper crushes him or incinerates him with a laser. Garrus, while not human, cares a great deal about the mission at large, and will gladly take up the mantle to charge the Reapers head on, even if Shepard were to fall again. My final decision is Garrus. Experience is adequate, charisma rivaled oly by Commander Shepard's, and stands beside him in his motiation to save the galaxy. Now, before anyone beats be over the head with a block of BS bigger than a krogan, just shut up and accept what I've said. I don't care to engage my fingertips in a length pissing contest of who's better suited than who. I shortened this entry significantly fro the original, and I guarantee you don't want me to bring all the crap I left out. :::P.S.- Garrus didn't get his team killed; Sidonis did. The punk sold his team out, lured Garrus away from his base, and allowed the mercs to get the jump on his team. Not his fault.--Kentasko 05:31, February 11, 2011 (UTC) Just a couple of quick points/follow-ups: *Regarding Point A, "Experience". You state that Zaeed has "lived his entire life knowing only the mercenary life." Not true. Zaeed, like Garrus, Jacob, and Mordin, is a military veteran, having served in the Alliance military. *Point B, "Charisma". Again, speaking from first-hand, practical, real-world military experience here, an XO is not supposed to be your friend. He is not supposed to "chum up with the rest of the crew". The XO is the Captain's right hand, the enforcer, the disciplinarian. The XO does not need to endear loyalty. That's what the Captain does. *Point C, "Motivation". As long as the XO follows orders, motivation is irrelevant. And as long as Zaeed is paid, he follows orders. We even see his willingness to follow Shepard after Shepard's actions allow Vido to escape. Garrus, as we've seen, will abandon what he's doing at the drop of a hat if something he thinks is more worthy pops up. He did it with C-Sec. Finally, it should go without saying that the commander/leader of an outfit bears ultimate, sole, and final responsibility for the lives of those under him. Sidonis sold out his team, this is true. But Sidonis couldn't have sold out the team if Garrus hadn't selected him to be on the team. Garrus bears ultimate responsibility, just as he would if made XO. Having said that, we see that Zaeed's experience far outstrips Garrus' chronologically, and Garrus has no real relevant experience that Zaeed does not. Charisma is, again, largely irrelevant in a position where you are essentially second fiddle, the go-between, the middle-man, and the enforcer of discipline. And both individuals have strengths and weaknesses in terms of motivation. It's still a win for Zaeed in my book. SpartHawg948 07:01, February 11, 2011 (UTC) Let's not forget Zaeed is a merc for hire. He has no reason to stay with Shepard as his contract with Cerberus is now finished. He even considered retiring after the mission, if he survived. To convince him to take on a position of command on the ship would be difficult, as he would have to adjust from being a free spirited merc to a full-time member of the ship. He does not appear to be the kind of man willing to ally himself to an organisation, not after years spent working purely for himself. He may stay for the sack of defending against the Reapers, but you just can’t put a man like him in a cage. Spart we all know you like Zaeed the most of all the characters (i do to), and Garrus does have what it takes. Almost. But he is not ready to lead yet. He lacks confidence and trust in himself, particularly after Sidonois, and as Sidonois showed he is still inexperienced with ensuring loyalty or at least, sensing treachery in others. Like the Shadow Broker says, Garrus could be a great leader, but he needs more time and experience.--Ironreaper 14:49, February 11, 2011 (UTC) :You seem to be overlooking the fact that I myself have explicitly stated that Zaeed is a merc for hire. However, there is one thing he is loyal to: A paycheck. As I myself have stated, if adequately motivated, such as by the paycheck he would presumably be receiving, being a contractor and not an actual member of Cerberus, he'd be the ideal choice. If anything, we can apply your argument to disqualify Garrus. He has no allegiance whatsoever to Cerberus. He doesn't even seem to be getting paid by them. His loyalty is purely of a personal nature to Shepard. This would seem to be a serious mark against him as far as assuming the mantle of XO would go. Zaeed, on the other hand, has made statements hinting that he'd be willing, if sufficiently motivated, to work with Cerberus on a longer-term basis. He hasn't made his feelings known about non-humans in general, but we do know of his antipathy towards batarians. SpartHawg948 19:19, February 11, 2011 (UTC) Indeed. Zaeed has expressed a passionate hatred toward batarian terrorists. Has he made statements about working with Carberus for a longer term period? Is that one of his character moments on the Normandy? missed that one. Just hope his price isnt too high, since TIM still trying to may up for the Normandy, bringing Shepard back and the damage inflicted during the last book. Ultimately it seems pointless to delve into this further. As Spart stated Jacob would be the most likely option. His qualified, stable and allied with Cerberus, which is important as Miranda sent reports to TIM and was for the most part his eyes on the ship, which, last we heard, is TIM's ship. Jacob will have to do the same as XO. I can see Garrus taking Jacob's duties as the new Gunnery Sergent.--Ironreaper 02:08, February 12, 2011 (UTC) :No, Zaeed never comments about working with Cerberus long-term. I was more referring to his feelings about batarians. I suppose my comment was a tad... misleading though. I was more going for pointing out that, of the two, Zaeed is much more likely to be willing to work for Cerberus than Garrus would be. Finally, I just want to point out a couple of things regarding Jacob. He isn't "allied with Cerberus". He's a member of Cerberus, same as Miranda. And lastly, Gunnery Sergeant (it's spelled with an A, sergeant, not sergent) is a rank, not a position within a crew. Jacob's actual title was likely something like Armorer something like that, as he was in charge of the armory. SpartHawg948 08:02, February 12, 2011 (UTC) For Shepard's second in command I would say Garrus, since he's someone Shepard can trust, but also because of the Shadow Broker's info on him suggests that he has the potential to be a great leader like Shepard, the only thing keeping him back is being overshadowed by Shepard. I don't think Zaeed would be a good choice, Shepard can't trust him more than TIM is paying him and like Garrus he also mentions getting his whole team killed on missions, while Garrus is more remorseful, Zaeed doesn't give a crap who dies on his team. If you're talking about Shepard's second in command I would say Garrus, if it was only Cerberus crew and no Shepard, then probably TIM paying Zaeed to keep his loyalty.-- 00:59, March 5, 2011 (UTC) Assuming its up to us, I say there are only several candidates for being next. The first is Garrus. Garrus has always been my favorite, and he has experience commanding. Next would have to be Mordin. I say that because he was in the Salarian STG (I'm assuming he led a team, but that may not be the case). Other candidates would include Tali, Legion, and Joker. Now nobody would ever actually accept taking orders from Legion (I think Shepard is the only one to like him) and its been evidenced that Tali simply can't command respect. Mordin is out, simply because he's not trained for this kind of operation. I'm now stuck at a tie. Sure, Garrus got everyone killed last time, but does Joker have any experience actually commanding a ship? Well, come to think of it, he might have the ability. He knows everything he needs to know, and if you actually die at the end of the game, he sure seems to take over. So yeah. If I die and so does Miranda (Who I actually hated, but wouldn't intentionally let die), i'm leaving everything in command of the crippled pilot. --FoxtrotZero 14:11, April 20, 2011 (UTC) First of all shepard can choose to leave cerberus there fore he takes his ship with him. second of all the alliance takes it and is upgrading it on earth during mass effect 3 so therefore his XO will probly b an alliance XO like pressly. If not i would make Asheley my XO because she gets the job done "with i dont take shit attitude" that and she becomes a spectre in mass effect 3 so all of u are wrong but in the sake of the argument garrus wins cuz hes the chuck norris of turians :D (sorrry i dont know how to make my name a link) armykidbran